I will give that a try. Thanks. I just have a gut feeling that these sticks are what is holding my 965 back...
Printable View
I will give that a try. Thanks. I just have a gut feeling that these sticks are what is holding my 965 back...
I am having a problem with this. You are saying that 4 / (9/8) = 1.777. But that is wrong. It would have to be 2 / (9/8) for the resulting quotient of 1.777. 4 / (9/8) is 3.555.Quote:
Originally Posted by dejanh
Am I just missing something here or is there an error in your math? Either way please let me know because I am very confused.
finally got my system together.. whew.. man after the bios flash my board hung at cpu ini and I thought omg... then a cold boot brought it back... WHEW... my cpu is rev c0/c1 just confirmed.. I'll start some ocing tomorrow night..Quote:
Originally Posted by revenant
got my system up and running on friday
http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/5938/nhmzl5.jpg
i know this part can go a lot higher even on air cooling (i am using a Noctua NH-U12P SE1366) but 4ghz is plenty for me. parts from this batch have hit 5ghz on air at 1.48V. my room is getting warm as i type this lol. :flame:
also im not done lowering the voltage yet. at 1V this part rates 3.6ghz, having internal data helps. :D
so i figure 4ghz with safety + droop is 1.1V or so. ill have more time this weekend to tweak it.
Sweet cherry picked CPU.Quote:
Originally Posted by dmenscornell
Eh , it's not that good TBH. Mine 920 is better.Quote:
Originally Posted by X.T.R.E.M.E_ICE
heh what vcc do you need for 4ghz? the part i have rates off the chart on the IDV measurement.Quote:
Originally Posted by 003
What is all this talk about the Intel INF utility? Should we be checking it out or what?
I'm using OCZ 6Gb kit @ 1600 8-8-8-24 1T with QPI 1.35 and Dram 1.64.Quote:
Originally Posted by bmilos
Same here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cooperdale
Same RAM high-five!
Hehe, high-five man. It's good RAM, for the first time in years I tried something other than Corsair and it's better than I thought.Quote:
Originally Posted by kompulsive
This is one of the benchmark results in the CPU3D.com review of the P6T running at 4GHz. :rofl:
http://chuckbam.com/i7_P6T-D/1-CPU3D_4GHz.PNG
This is me with a cheap DDR3 Ver. of an HD 3870
http://chuckbam.com/i7_P6T-D/1-PCMARK05.PNG
.
My 24/7 so far ,temps are good and needs less volts than 21 x 200. Still working on that with lower volts. These Gskill PI blacks are sweet.
About my previous message, I can confirm I had not disabled C1E in bios. When I do, both Cpu-z and RealTemp show fixed frequency. When I don't, only Cpu-z shows (wrongly) fixed frequency.
You got the maths right, 3555Mhz for uncore. Remember the ram runs at the same BCLK, but with half the multiplier, so 1777Mhz.Quote:
Originally Posted by 003
Interesting, and sweet RAM speed. Are those rated 1800 8,8,8 or just OCed? Edit...just saw they are 1600, very impressive for running 12Gb ram:clap: Glad to see that, I was starting to think when I upgrade to windows 7 + more than my 3gb ram, my OC was going to get hosed...but maybe not. How much DRAM volts and QPI/Vtt are u using?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bootsy
I am using 21x200 now for 24/7, need to check 183x23:D. I thought at 4.1 I needed about same or maybe 1 less notch with 21 multi, have not checked 183x23 yet...though mine may be different. But definitely both way better than using 22 multi.
Same as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by kompulsive
so as far as I can tell, i965 and i940 are pretty much a waste of $$
EDIT: For air and water atleast
Doesn't the 920 top out @ 20x multi? I doubt i could get my 23x perma-turbo multi on a 920 :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobbylite
Anyone else getting really random vdroop? Setting 1.44v in bios gives me 1.424v in cpu-z under load, setting 1.46v in bios gives the same. Setting 1.475v in bios gives 1.456v real @ idle, 1.44v under load. Still that means i've nailed 185x23 =4.25ghz 10hr prime stable with 1.44v, which is not bad i guess. Now going for 4.3ghz with 23x187.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
Coolit Freezone Elite. :) nice self contained unit, don't need to worry about ambient temps bringing your base temp up.. I dunno, some people don't like them but I think it would be a good compliment to this hot quad.
Does anyone know why running four instances of Orthos is only putting my loads at 100%, 100%, 50%, and 50%?
I concur...Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobbylite
I went and returned my 965 and exchanged it for a 920.
My max stable oc on the 965 was 4.3 and guess what my max stable oc on the 920 is... Give up?
4.3 :D
Guess for me the 965 was just a waste of money since I can do the exact same thing with my 920. With the exact same volts by the way.
All I know is 4.3 for $320 is WAY better than 4.3 for $1150. Seriously
And my ram, qpi and uncore speeds are almost identical to what they were on my 965 4.3 overclock.
So lost 200 pts on everest read, write and copy but I put $700 back in my pocket...
no brainer, huh?
Anyway, it's funny how context is so important. I was really dissapointed in a 4.3 clock on the 965 but I'm thrilled with the same clock on the 920
What kind of temps can you get with this?Quote:
Originally Posted by revenant
lol sonofander :ROTF: , 4.3 , ht on ? turbo on ?
Use Prime, man!Quote:
Originally Posted by kompulsive
You are right...my bad. I know what I was thinking, but I wrote it down wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by 003
In my testing I showed that Uncore higher than 4.0GHz was unstable, and particularly unstable if it passed QPI maximum of 4.0GHz. Therefore, I assumed an upper Uncore limit of 4.0GHz. Since Uncore is 2xDRAM then max DRAM is 2.0GHz but going by the safe Uncore:QPI relationship that would make max Uncore 3.555GHz which is 1.777GHz memory.
I think with lower overclocks you can run memory higher and still be stable as the overall stress on the IMC and other components is much less.
Meh im not a fan of tec cooling, for the same money i can build a 600W water cooling loop, where i can cool everything in my system. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by revenant
Ok, what settings? Sorry, this is my first time OCing in like six years!Quote:
Originally Posted by Xello
Actually I have no vdroop. The vcore under load is slightly higher, not lower, in my case. Goes from 1.34375 to roughly 1.35. No turbo on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xello
Quote:
Originally Posted by kompulsive
You should run 8 instances of Orthos I guess, since there are 8 logical cores.Quote:
Originally Posted by kompulsive
Anyway I think the best way to stress these systems is with LinX. You can run two instances of LinX, each on half the available memory, and change the affinity to core 0,2,4,5 for one instance and core 1,3,5,7 for the other. This will evenly distribute the load and really put your core i7 to the test. Temps will be about 5°C higher than with Prime95, and you'll see if your system's stable in about 20 minutes (10 runs of LinX) instead of 20 hours.
So can I assume overclocking the ram isn't even neccessary with Core i7 due to the low FSB needed? (or am I wrong about this because the memory multipliers are different?)
I remember back in the Conroe days to fully OC a E6300 required someone to have a nice set of Micron D9s pushing a FSB of 500+?
So am I safe to assume any old set of DDR3 ram will work for maximum OC?
Or does Memory bandwidth actually affect system performance with Core i7? On Conroe as I remember memory bandwith wasn't really the bottleneck (it was almost purely CPU performance that mattered)
Your likely getting same vdroop at those similar settings, you are just seeing the limits of having the bios capable of setting volts in .00625v steps, but sensors read in steps of .016v. So when you increase volts .006, your idle likely increases .006, your load increases .006 but the sensor may read the same (depending on where volts actually are) until you increase vcore enough to get past midway point of next sensor value and thus rounds up to the next highest setting (even though you wont actually be there either).Quote:
Originally Posted by Xello
If you plot out a bunch of OC points and record bios, cpuz idle and cpuz load, you can make an excel sheet in few minutes with bios value, cpuz idle sensor reading ie, vdrop (+/- .08v sensor rounding error), cpuz load sensor reading, ie vdroop (+/-.08v sensor rounding error), then easily plot out actual values for idle and load that cpuz is really reading, by knowing it increases in steps of .00625 and finding the rounding error points. (this is just what sensor is actually reading, does not mean same as multimeter)
I dont know if I explained that very well, actually takes just few minutes with excel, if you keep a tab of bios, cpuz idle and load values. Just helps me with seeing how OC really scales, so I can get to other stable points quickly.
Aha, well i'm no pro but i can tell you i've found prime to be 100% reliable :) And i hear it's one of the best for quad cores.Quote:
Originally Posted by kompulsive
You don't really need any settings for prime, it will run the appropriate number of threads automatically. Just choose 'blend' test and let it run for 8-10hr minimum :up: From my experience with IBT on my QX9650 i don't use it, my 24hr prime stable setting was not stable according to IBT. Yet it was crash-free for the entire time i ran my overclock :)
Yeah i think it's this board, it's getting ridiculous, i up the voltage from 1.475v to 1.48v and i'm still getting 1.465v idle, 1.44v load. :(Quote:
Originally Posted by Cooperdale
From what i can figure out tri-channel is going to give you more bandwidth than you will ever need. On X48 i was running 2x2gb of corsair 1600mhz 9-9-9-24 with something like 10,000 read score in everest. Even that was more than i needed. With X58 i'm on 3x2gb corsair 1600mhz 9-9-9-24 and the read has went up to 16-17k without upping clocks / tuning timings :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by Aryton Senna
Depends what you use the system for i guess, for games / general use tri-channel is probably overkill but on the server side, just check out that article on Anandtech from yesterday :)
there is no difference between ddr3-1200 and ddr3-1600 in real world scenarios, IE Gaming, superpi 1m, wprime 32m + 1024m pifast
And you put in context too that you can't seem to use memory @ a frequency much then 1600, because after that you'll have to sacrifice CPU OC in order to get more mem speed. And because with high qpi speed and uncore speed 920 don't seem to get stable, you most likely won't hit ddr2000.Quote:
Originally Posted by sonofander
But for what you said, you are indeed correct.
yeah, true... you're limited to the cpu only with the freezone. and it's not cheap.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
I cant imagine having a problem running 2000mhz ram (although its pointless) 200bclk x10 ram multi gets you there. Am I missing something?:yepp:Quote:
Originally Posted by D3mon_Hunt3r
This is an exerpt from Dejanh's post.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobbylite
Quote:
1. Why is it that I cannot run my 2000MHz memory in my new Core i7 system?
To understand this note the maximum QPI link speed we mentioned earlier. Using the simple ratio we defined, we can see that with the maximum QPI link speed of 4.0GHz we can have a theoretical maximum Uncore of 4.0GHz and a maximum memory speed of 2.0GHz. These however are only theoretical maximums and are by no means guaranteed. For starters, QPI and Uncore cannot be run at the same speed as any clock oscillations can result in a crash if the ratio of QPI to Uncore ever falls below 1:1. Therefore, Uncore must always be below QPI to avoid this, and preferably below the 8:9 Uncore to QPI ratio to guarantee stability. Consequently, if we cannot achieve 4.0GHz Uncore, this means that we absolutely cannot achieve 2.0GHz memory and we can therefore not guarantee any stability for 2.0GHz memory. Technically, the maximum DRAM speed for a stable system is equal to ((Max. Uncore) / (Safe QPI:Uncore Ratio)) / 2 or (4.0GHz / 9:8) / 2 = 1.777GHz. In between 1.777GHz DRAM and 2.0GHz DRAM you are likely to experience some level of instability over the long term. Past 2.0GHz you are just plain lucky.
I dont think that should be a problem. Couple guys have uncore higher than qpi
user dependent ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobbylite
congrats on the 100th post brutha.
Even if I couldn't run ddr3 2000, would it matter? All tests have shown minimal real world perforamance gain with memory ocing on i7.
FWIW I wasn't trying to run 2000 even when I had the 965. ~1700 @ 8-8-8 is more than good enough for me
Well, I can say that so far I've been fairly bios-dependent as to whether I can run 200bclk or not. F4k seems to work well and passes 8-12 hours of Prime95 while F4n doesn't even post. F4l was fine but the bios corrupted on my so I tried F4k.
I'm running the following multis:
Bclk - 200
CPU - 16
RAM - 8
Uncore - 16
QPI - 18 (38 in bios)
This is stable, while when I put the Uncore up to 18 it won't post.
I still have yet to tighten my RAM timings up to their rated spec, but that will come later.
So there is some merit to dejanh's theory in my case. Whether this is true for all boards/bios remains to be seen.
I just identified in my testing that running Uncore higher than QPI is not stable over long term. Also, running Uncore so high (4GHz+) is also not stable. Puts too much stress on components.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobbylite
Some of these things change of course when you are sub-zero and again, I do not have access to every mobo and processors for cherry picking so there is always a chance I missed something. Seems to be a good functional guideline for a lot of users out there though :)
I wish I didn't have to, but I pay for my own testing equipment so there is only so much I can afford :p:
Quote:
Originally Posted by dejanh
I took your advice and I was finally able to run stable 200 x 21.
One question. that whole 8:9 ratio, which in actuality is .888333 instead of .888999 does that also need to apply when Bclk is under 200?
Reason is that I have to run mem at 6x and uncore at 15x to get 200x21 stable.
If I lower Bclk to 199, then I can run mem at 8x and uncore at 16x.
I've run prime 95 for a while and it seems stable, though, I know I need to let it run for a longer period of time, but normally when one of my configs is unstable, it crashes within 5 minutes.
I'm not specificaly pointing to dejanh post but more specifically talking about issues with high Uncore using 920's.
I'd go Linpack or LinX if I were you. 10 minutes and you know if you're stable or not. And it's much more thorough than Prime as far as temps go.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukee
So after reading this I should'nt wait on 2000MHz RAM but just be satisfied with 1600MHz?
How can you calcutate how mutch you need to push your CPU in order to get it stable and run your mem @ 2000MHz?
I love the LinX load. It definately heats the processor up more than anything else, and crashes sooner too.
For those that prefer Prime95, why are you not just getting the latest version? It will find and run 8 instance in 1 window. http://www.mersenne.org/freesoft/ Step 3.
Here is what I have so far. I am sure that I can tweak a bit more out of both the processor and memory, but I am pretty comfortable with this. I also had troubles with x20 CPU multi, but then I was running the RAM slower also.
http://i364.photobucket.com/albums/o.../i7OC38Ghz.jpg
1. That is 21MHz less (case in point, I can run 23x179MHz all day long at 100% load on all 8 threads but no matter what I do I cannot make 23x180MHz stable on air cooling).Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukee
2. 199MHz BCLK with DRAM at 8x and uncore at 16x is still in 8:9 ratio to your QPI which would be 199x18 at that point in time (3184MHz Uncore / 3582MHz QPI == 8:9). The ratio is still maintained.
One thing to note is that these chips seem to have very fine stress points and certain combinations appear to be very demanding on the system. Particularly, when using BCLK of 200MHz+ the components appear to be really stressed so I found that staying below those "threshold" ratios usually results in a much more stable system. When BCLK is below 200MHz I found I have a lot more flexibility with DRAM, Uncore, and QPI. I do always try to at the very least maintain the ratio I specified, even when below 200MHz BCLK.
Strange thing happened today.
I was running BOINC and F@H GPU to do some further testing and I came home to find my rig shut down.
I checked my RealTemp log and nothing strange there. Temps never went over 80 and the system had previously passed Prime95 with these settings for 8+ hours. I guess it ran for about 3-4 hours then shut down. I'm going to try it with just BOINC to see if the same thing happens. If not then I'll try the F@H GPU.
I'm running the following multis:
Bclk - 200
CPU - 16
RAM - 8
Uncore - 16
QPI - 18 (36 in bios)
Everything else is auto.
CPU Volts are set at stock (1.26 in bios 1.2 idle 1.18 Load)
QPI/PLL is 1.355 bios
CPU PLL is 1.84v in bios
VDDR is 1.64 in bios
Everything else is auto.
You might wanna make sure that vista didn't put your rig to sleep. It seems on my system since I upgraded to i7, vista has this nasty habit of changing my settings to go to sleep after 30 min. I orignally thought my pc was shutting down till I noticed that.
Something to check on...
I have had the same issue.
Nope.Quote:
Originally Posted by sonofander
Turns out there was some work done on the power lines near my house.
I specifically asked my wife if something weird happened to the power today and she said no. :mad:
So my rig is fine :D :rofl:
My marriage...:shrug::shocked:
my stock clock temps are approx 29c idle and 49c load.. is that pretty normal?
:rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by zlojack
My wife crashes my rig all the time! She turns on the toaster oven and her hair dryer and poof!
I keep telling her to warn me but... Nothing worse than loosing and hour of progress in a game to your wife's hair dryer :(
I bought mine at Central Computer right here in down town San Francisco... (the Howard location).Quote:
Originally Posted by roller11
priming at (180x20) 3600 now with 1.23v and loads at between 57c and 60c (CM V8).
Got mine from newegg :up: :yepp:
I can prime all day at 20x180.. after you finish try running linpackQuote:
Originally Posted by revenant
ok - I will try linpack. I have been out of the whole OCing gig for more than a year now because I haven't had a new system to play with.. :p anyways, kind of getting up to speed on all of this stuff again.. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by safan80
WTF.. i can't get my damn board to do 200 b clock!!! AM I JUST UNLUCKY OR SOMETHING...
i lowered the multi and did 200 and still no go.... even ran 1.5v through cpu just to make sure that wasnt the limiting factor
which voltage should i be upping to go with the base clock!!! would that be qpi or what!?
what is the batch number on your cpu? can you get a 180 base clock?Quote:
Originally Posted by nosboost300
where do find batch number??
as for 180 b clock... yes i can do 180.. highest bootable bclock is 181
it would be on the retail box it says batch next to it. if you got an oem chip the only place you'd find it is on the chip. the number would be similar to what you see next to my cpu listing in my sig.Quote:
Originally Posted by nosboost300
3837a769 would be my batch
i know its not the cpu... cuz i even tried 200 b clock at 1.56v and no go
cooled with an apogee gtz
That's weird most ppl are reaching 210 max block some even more.
Upped QPI/VTT?
I've gotten mine up yo 215Bclk, not sure if I will actually run it at this though. As it is now @ 200 Bclk my 1333 ram is running at about 1606 @1.34v memtest stable. Not sure It could handle running much higher then that if I bump up the Bclk further. Guess I could drop my ram down to just under or around 1300 tho. Not sure how much of a difference that would make.
Am I missing something, I seem to see some people posting multipliers of over 20x on 920/940's... Its locked at 20x isnt it? Or is the p6T deluxe just fail?
Also was wondering what people were running as far as CPU PLL v, I have mine up to almost 1.9 @ 200 Blck x20 (4ghz), vcore 1.375. Is it worth upping CPU PLL further to get more stable @ lower vcores? Not sure what exactly is high/low for CPU PLL voltages.
More Everest results please :)
QPI/VTT at 1.9V is suicide for 24/7! :eek:
Up to 1.65V should be relatively safe (as safe as ocing can be ;) ), but 2V kill an i7 - not to say - instantly, but quite fast. That's was saaya was telling in one of the threads concerning voltages.
Yea sry about that, I definatly meant CPU PLL voltage :DQuote:
Originally Posted by SAE
Really not sure how much the pll voltage effects everything.
Anyway just screwed with it a bit, Can post @ 215 Bclk (No windows)
Windows @ 213 (low Multi High vcore)
http://img399.imageshack.us/img399/4...3x15nz3.th.jpg
Windows @ 210 (20x multi)
http://img399.imageshack.us/img399/3...0x20dx9.th.jpg
Anything over 1.4 vcore is a bit high for me, I guess Ill have to see what I can get running stable:yepp:
These chips dont seem half bad so far, at under $300 the 920 seems great, glad I didnt shell out extra for 940/extreme.
Odd how different some of these chips are fairing so far, im really surprised some people are stuck at 180 bclk :(
Ill throw up some benchies once I get something fairly stable
Please post the following:Quote:
Originally Posted by nosboost300
CPU Mult
QPI Multi
Uncore Mult
Memory Mult
CPU V
Qpi/vtt V
I'm thinking that it is an issue with one of those multipliers that is causing you to not boot up at 200 Bclk.
When ya'll say 'i can reach this bclock' etc, are you talking about 100% stable bclocks or just benchable bclocks or just bootable bclocks?
Max i've booted is 222 but i had to drop to 213 for 100% stability, with 1.44v QPI.
for some reason, I can't hit 210 Bclk unless my qpi is like 1.7+Quote:
Originally Posted by Xello
Ummmm yeah i wouldn't run that high QPI :eek:
I don't want to go near 1.5v myself, though really some knowledgeable people are saying 1.65v is fine... But i mean if only 1.4-1.44v can get me 213 i think i'll just take it and be happy :)
Jumped from my 187x23 to 192x23 - Windows wouldn't even load :D So i dropped one at a time and i'm currently @ 189 bclk which is looking to be my max stable with 23x multi. Any higher cpu mhz and i will need to go over 1.5v which i just will not do. This gets me 4.35ghz~ though and 9.6s~ SP 1m which is not bad, and still loaded at 59c (HT off) I still think i'll end up dropping to 1.3-1.33v and sticking with the 4.1ghz for 24/7.
OMG! the guru is back to the addiction!!! :bows:Quote:
Originally Posted by SAE
YGPM :D
If you guys are hitting 210+ on less than 1.6, how are you doing it? Would raising vcore help? What are you using for qpi pll?Quote:
Originally Posted by Xello
I haven't touched QPI PLL, i've still to find out what CPU / QPU PLL does.
All i did was set 1.44v QPI, remove other bottlenecks (low cpu multi, memory, 17x uncore 18x QPI). I went straight from stock to 1.44v aswell, so i'm not sure how much i actually need, it could be less.
Maybe chips will vary in max stable bclk as much as they do in max stable cpu clock?
P.s i've not seen any evidence that vcore affects QPI. I had 1.275v set when i was 1.44v QPI + 213mhz stable.
But isn't Intel's suggested limit for QPI/vtt 1.35V? Why should this limit not be taken into account, when the limit on vcore (1.55) is much higher than what most people are running on their rigs?Quote:
Originally Posted by Xello
I can't cross BCLK 160 with 1.35 QPI.
because 1.55 comes with a massive amount of heat
its a suggestion as well, not sure if you saw the 2000mhz corsair cas7 preview but they require 1.65QPI/VTT at this point atleast
dejanh, I'm having some trouble with the ratios theory here.
I've had two different settings pass 12h ond 8h Prime95 stable on two different bios versions and it definitely doesn't follow the "rule" you stated.
Setup number one does not follow the rule but it's stable. Setup number 2 does follow the rule and is also stable. The one constant is that the QPI stays below the 4GHz threshold. Could that be all that's required?
I've also tried on bios F4k and I've been having some stability issues with BOINC that I haven't worked out yet. Of course, all of this on the stock cooler doesn't help.
1) Bios F2 - Bclk 160 - RAM 10x - UC 20x - QPI 18x
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...g?t=1229623815
2) Bios F4l - Bclk 200 - RAM 8x - UC 16x - QPI 18x
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...g?t=1229623816
Are you sure it's not dram voltage? 1.65 QPI is damn high.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobbylite
EDIT: I checked, you're right. I still am afraid, we're in testing stages with this new platform. I hope these QPI voltages are not deleterious for the system...
It is 1.65v QPI in their profile. Kind of strange, and probably not an option for the aircooled crowd.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cooperdale
I've got good air cooling, but I still can't bring myself to go over 1.35 QPI. I'm too afraid of making the system's life very short...
Does QPI involve the cpu temp, or the system temp?
I've gone up to 1.65 VTT myself, although, since I learned (not too long ago) that Intel says 1.35 max, I've dropped down to 1.4 and under. Im not opposed to going over 1.35, as it helps stability, but I also not going to EVER go over 1.55 again...
Mine is at 1.4125 atm, probably could lower but will need to be raised as I keep pushing anyways
I've gone as far as 1.83 vtt to try to boot into 220 Bclk,
I've settled for about 1.35-1.4 as my 24/7 setting.
Glad to have some feedback! :) The more discussion stirs up, the more we can dissect the intricate aspects of i7 overclocking ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by zlojack
1. In terms of the QPI having to stay below 4GHz, yes, this is definitely correct. QPI higher than 4GHz will not run on 99.9% of the boards and chips. This is critical.
2. In terms of the Uncore:QPI ratio of 8:9...I think I edited the original post the next day to reflect some people saying "I'm running Uncore higher than my QPI". While this is very possible I found that this is (a) not stable when dealing with high clocks (3.9GHz+) at least in my test setup, and (b) not exactly an option on i7 920 and i7 940 when you get to high clocks at all as you are driving your DRAM, Uncore, and QPI all based on the same high BCLK. If you use a 200MHz BCLK your lowest option for QPI is 3600MHz which is already getting up there. I tried running DRAM at 1800MHz with this and the Uncore with 3600MHz and I was completly unstable. Lowering the memory to 1600MHz (more within the ratio I defined) made the system more stable. Same holds up if I go to 180MHz BCLK with a 23x multiplier (turbo on i7 940). I put the QPI below Uncore to the test by assigning a 18x multiplier (3240MHz) to QPI and running my DRAM at 1800MHz (3600MHz Uncore). The system was unstable. Then I restored the QPI ratio to 22x for 3960MHz and the system was once again stable.
Overall, the 8:9 Uncore:QPI is not a hard rule. I just found it to be a "safe" rule in my testing. Adding to it you have to consider that Intel does not randomly spec out their processors. If they felt that ratios between different components of the CPU could be different, they probably would have set them up different, so there must be some reasoning behind their factory set ratios. They had the option easily to make the Uncore and QPI run at the same speed from the factory, or even higher, but they chose not to. I believe I found why they did that through my testing, and I do not think that it is just becase there is *maybe* no performance increase in running Uncore more than 2x DRAM. Kind of like with AMD where on the X2 processors you had to keep your HT as close as possible to 1GHz to balance stability and performance. Much higher than 1GHz and poof, the system dies, much lower and you are sacrificing performance.
cpu multi 20Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukee
qpi multi 26
uncore multi 16 (or even auto.. i've had it running 4000mhz just fine)
memory multi 8x (to get rid of that as a limiting factor)
cpu voltage 1.55 (also to eliminate that as a factor)
qpi/vtt v 1.55
cpu pll 1.9
ioh core (or whatever uncore voltage was) 1.45
tried with load line calibration on and off
clock skew's upped 50ps
WILL NOT RUN 200 BCLOCK... and i'm pissed... i was hoping to hit 26k 3dmark06 before shipping off these 260's i just sold.. but looks like that ain't gonna happen!
Got my max stable bclk and 23x cpu clock, time for some RAM!
How are you guys finding your 1.65v rated kits when it comes to overclocking? I have virtually the same Corsair kit as i had on my X48 only that was 2x2gb 1.8v and now it's 3x2gb 1.65v. I had no problems with the old kit going to 1.99v and being 1800mhz stable, i'm not sure what to expect from the new kit.
Is it still reasonable to pump an extra .2v into the 1.65v kits and get some performance gains, or should we be more conservative now? I don't want to just jump start it with 1.85v incase i fry something ;)
1.85 sounds a bit much IMO maybe like 1.74-1.8?
Yeah just an example :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobbylite
For the previous kit i was able to judge it based on several reviews, but i can't find a single review for the new kit anywhere :mad:
That qpi mult, is that a typo? should it be 36x?Quote:
Originally Posted by nosboost300
Ok, try this..
uncore multi - 15x
mem multi - 6x
I know.. you don't want to lower it.. just try it first and see if you can get that stable!!
You can probably lower Vcore to like 1.45 or so. and you can turn on turbo :)
I had the same problem you did and those adjustments allowed me to stabilize at 200 Bclk.
okay... well i'm running 197 b clock right now... i managed a 195 3dmark run.. but my freakin qpi is 1.6v now.. seems kinda scary is it not???
anywho.. i'm going to run 3dmark06... if i'm not back in about 7 minutes (i think thats how long 3dmark06 was...) then my computer screwed up.. haha
and yes that was a typo :p
197 qpi success!
Cool!!!! What are your settings?Quote:
Originally Posted by Movieman
I have the Corsair Dominator XMS3 1.65V 3x2GB 1600MHz kit and I can easily get 1800MHz out of it without any voltage tweaks really. It runs 1800MHz just as it runs 1600MHz at 1.65V. Going to 1900MHz I have to up the voltage to about 1.68V - 1.7V, but that is it. Right now I am running them at 1.65V 1800MHz.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xello
Wow that is a reference to an old post, hehe. Anyway, his settings won't matter to you. Every board is different from what I can tell so far. With Asus look only for Asus-specific settings. Just as an example, R2E overvolts every voltage you set, but the Gigabyte boards seem to undervolt.Quote:
Originally Posted by skypx
What are your timings for both 1600 and 1800?Quote:
Originally Posted by dejanh
Very good response!Quote:
Originally Posted by dejanh
Thanks again for your input.
I'm going to continue to do more testing and once I get proper cooling I'll be able to start eliminating some factors from the stability equation (at least some heat!)
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y26...ost300/26k.png
198 bclk... still can't get 200...
Has anyone seen anthing about whether ASUS is going to be releasing any BIOS updates which will let us adjust the QPI and/or memory multipliers downwards? I think that it's holding my rig back significantly. I have 4.0Ghz rock stable at 1.36v with HT on but have to use a Bclk of 211 and a 19x multiplier to do it.
Yeah... I guess it's possible that everyone here running over that spec including myself will be shelling out for a new chip in a few months. I'm hoping not :) Also, there is Saaya's VTT graveyard thread which has some info on the first posts of rigs which have been running at certain settings, one of which is 1.45v. If i check that post one day and read that the cpu is bust, i'll reduce mine instantly and pray!Quote:
Originally Posted by Cooperdale
Cool, i've started with 1648mhz and 2 hour stable so i'll increase bclk 3 or 4 points and see what i can get before i increase V's. I assume they're still samsung IC's, they appear to overclock extremely well. If they can go to the 1800mhz~ mark that will make the final i7 OC alot better!Quote:
Originally Posted by dejanh
Is there a way to find out what your memory's stock timings are? The board has setting 1T for me this whole time and i didn't realize, i think it's meant to be 2T for stock, because under cpu-z SPD tab under the XMP-1600 profile it has 2T CR . All my sub-timings are on Auto in bios, i have 1.66v manually and 9-9-9-24 manually.
There's a 'performance' setting in bios where you can choose Standard, Turbo or Extreme, it's Turbo on default, is that something to do with memory sub-timings? Perhaps that's why i'm on 1T.
Anyway since it's setting 1T i was wondering if there might be any other timings it's tuning without my say-so, i really want them all @ stock while i find max clocks, i'll find timings later. CPU Tweaker is good for showing you all your timings in windows, but i don't know if the numbers i'm seeing are @ stock or not.
8-8-8-24-2T (default timings, need to tighten still so may require a bit more volts than 1.65)Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukee
:) I'm still baffled by one thing though...turbo and when it shuts off. If I Prime and the temp hits 85C turbo shuts off but the CPU does not crash, but if I just run some application (like Vantage CPU test) and the temp goes to 85C the system hardlocks. But this is only on 23x180MHz, not 23x179MHz :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by zlojack
I would not hold my breath on this. Nobody is doing it, so I do not think Asus will either...maybe post it as a Feedback and Suggestion on Asus forums?Quote:
Originally Posted by Classic Satch
Dominators are 8-8-8-24-2T stock.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xello